Talk:Sprite
Would any one object if I sub-headed the Nannasprite's section and rearranged the article to allow the inclusion of other Sprites at a later time? It is a widely held theory that each kid will have one, and the four place holders for orbs support this. It'll be messy work but I'm willing to do it, just need to know it won't be immediately undone.--DukeLions 03:06, September 21, 2009 (UTC) I wouldn't object to turning the Nannaquin's page into a The 'Kernelsprites' page, in a similar vein as the Homestuck Kids or Guardians articles, though it seems a little pre-emptive at this time. I don't doubt we'll need such a page at some point though.--Bunnyboi 03:25, September 21, 2009 (UTC) It might be simpler to turn the Kernelsprite page into the Nannasprite page and just make a new Kernelsprites page. I know its not needed right now, but its a near unavoidable issue. Just thinking ahead and trying to make the Wiki more friendly for small edits, for people who don't want to create a new page when needed but might want to put in some trivia now and then. So what do you think about me moving the page and creating a new Kernelsprites page?--DukeLions 03:57, September 21, 2009 (UTC) Hmmm. I'd support that idea. However, a Kernelsprites page would likely compare and contrast different kernelsprites. So far there's only one.--Bunnyboi 04:08, September 21, 2009 (UTC) I guess I'll wait then. But it feels good to have a game plan.--DukeLions 04:44, September 21, 2009 (UTC) That's true, but we have an even more pressing concern for now. gardenGnostic's revelation is going to give us a lot of information and articles to update.--Bunnyboi 04:46, September 21, 2009 (UTC) Oh yeah. That is going to one wild ride. Oh the anticipation!--DukeLions 13:47, September 21, 2009 (UTC) The "Rambunctious Crow ghost" seen on the monitor wasn't a kernelsprite. dave didn't get to using sburb yet Homestuck has already shown a penchant for having characters work on separate timelines.--Bunnyboi 01:02, October 3, 2009 (UTC) yes, but pesterchum makes it possible to tell what point each character is The Eldritch Princess was modified before we even got to see what it originally looked like. Rose mauled it with her sewing skills. It was a princess, now it's an Eldritch princess, so those tentacles are NOT normal. Traits and Likenesses A lot of this bit seems either pointless, made up, or guesses. In particular, the 'chronic injury' bit, doesn't appear to be true as the Jasper/Princess sprite is unharmed from what we've seen. The tentacles are not an injury. I think it's just trying to see patterns where there are none. I would personally remove the chronic injury section, as well as any guesses on future sprites that aren't based on anything we've seen. But I didn't want to do it without seeing what other people thoughtAlienatedduck 14:13, February 22, 2010 (UTC) Well, I removed it, at any rate. The entire section was pointless, it made the article way longer than it needed to be, it forced readers to scroll past it in order to get to the actual content-- and it's just bad practice to drop a huge glob of speculation into the middle of an article anyway. Majutsukai 03:12, June 28, 2010 (UTC) Terminology This might be nitpicking of me, but aren't Sprites and Kernelsprites different things? The Kernelsprite is what you get when you prototype the Kernel that emerges from the Cruxtruder. Upon entering the Medium, the Kernel-half of the Kernelsprite splits into Light and Dark and spreads its prototypings to the denizens of the Medium. The Sprite half is left behind to assist the player that created it. As a result, wouldn't it be more correct to just call them Sprites after the Kernel-half has left? --Nerva Magnum 03:41, August 25, 2010 (UTC) You're right, of course, but I'm not sure it's necessary to make such a fine distinction for the purposes of this article. Majutsukai 10:38, August 25, 2010 (UTC) \So who made the decision to move this to "Sprite"? "Kernelsprite" works better, IMO. - Janaro out. 12:30, October 22, 2010 (UTC) I moved it, on account of this article not actually being about kernelsprites at all. ~Octachor n 18:33, October 22, 2010 (UTC) Split Anyone else think we should split off the individal sprites into their own articles? It's been bugging me for a while now. ~Octachor n 01:12, September 22, 2010 (UTC) It seems to me that they already have their own articles. Nanna, AFDave, Jaspers, and Aradia all have a section of their page devoted to their life as a kernelsprite. We aren't going to learn enough about the lusus kernelsprites in my opinion to warrant creating a whole page for each. I would agree with moving AFDave to a page called Davesprite, but then again I would rather not rename Jaspers to Jaspersprite and Nanna to Nannasprite because they are important characters regardless of being sprites. So with the consideration of symmetry I think it would be better to leave AFDave the way it is. Loverdesang 17:40, September 22, 2010 (UTC) They do have their own articles, but this page is used as the primary one for their sprite states. I think the sections for the individual sprites should go on their respective pages, and this article should be used to describe sprites in general. ~Octachor n 20:37, September 22, 2010 (UTC) I agree that this page could become more about kernelsprites in general. I like to think of this page as more of a disambiguation article. However, I do think there needs to be at least one page where all of the kernelsprites from the individual sessions are put next to each other to be compared. Loverdesang 23:07, September 24, 2010 (UTC) Recent Developments "According to Davesprite, Sburb players unlock the power to have their Kernelsprites accompany them through the gates at a later point in the game. " Nannasprite JUST NOW gave John a pendant that (unless she's pranking him) will allow him to summon her at any time. Is this what Davesprite was talking about? ferailo9 16:32, October 27, 2010 (UTC) :Without a doubt, so go ahead and add it into the page if you like. - Jumpjet2k 17:26, October 27, 2010 (UTC) SPRITE SHEETS Where do i put the sheets then? any ideas? -Jack Blackstone :Just make a "sprite sheets" page. ~Octachor n 20:52, February 18, 2011 (UTC) Sprite colours So, this may be coincidence, but isn't it the case that all the beta kids' sprites are the same colours as their corresponding alphas kids' text colour / symbols? In which case, I'm guessing the reverse will also be true. 13:10, January 27, 2012 (UTC)prunescholar I agree with that theory. Only problem is that the Alpha Session's Prospit and Derse have no prototyping towers, so the Sprites would be all but useless. experimentalDeity 13:37, January 27, 2012 (UTC) My original theory was incorrect. We've now seen Jane's unprototyped kernel, and the relationship between the spite / text colours follows that in the image to the right - From outermost to innermost: •John •Jane’s Sprite •Nannasprite •Jane Don't know if we'll ever see the other kernels, but it would be interesting if they also followed this pattern. Prunescholar 07:50, April 10, 2012 (UTC) :I can see that this conversation has been long abandoned, but I do think that it would be interesting to see more charts along this format of B1 kid text / B2 sprite body / B1 sprite body / B2 kid text, with of course Jaspersprite's text included in there wherever it naturally fits in the color progression. 10:25, December 27, 2012 (UTC) Upcoming sprites Would anyone believe that the other two pre-scratch kids Sprites are more dead trolls? :Considering how many people assumed prior to this update that the remaining 3 would be like this, I am fairly sure everyone is willing to believe it, though I personally suspect a twist with at least one of the sprites (e.g. 1 troll prototyping + 1 non-troll prototyping). - The Light6 (talk) 11:43, November 28, 2012 (UTC) ::There are only three A2 troll corpses left (Equius, Nepeta and Feferi), so at least one of Roxy and Dirk's sprites can't be a double troll combo. Unless of course a friendly clown managed to find Aradia's original corpse from god knows how long back. 12:48, November 28, 2012 (UTC) :::Yeah, hence why I think there will be a twist with one of them. But yeah, considering Aradia's body was kinda destroyed and she is currently alive I doubt we will see her prototyped, especially since we already saw her as a sprite, why do it again? But it is worth noting that Sollux had two corpses, however for various reasons I doubt Gamzee got Sollux's other one. - The Light6 (talk) 12:53, November 28, 2012 (UTC) ::::If you mean Sollux's pre-entry corpse, then he may also have had access to Vriska's pre-ascention one as well, not to mention the possibility of others (like himself, or Eridan). Gamzee's presence in the Cherubs' session may also be an attempt to aquire Calliope's dead dream self. We also know from Aradia that ghosts can be prototyped, but it's obvious that Solerisprite was not created in that manner. There are certainly a lot of possibilities, but I think I'll stick with the original theory. Taneth (talk) 15:13, November 28, 2012 (UTC) ::::::I'm betting the mix will be Equius and Sollux for Dirk's sprite... because of Sollux's whole bifrucation gimmick... unless it's just Equius.. But I'd place money on and Equisol. -- FaeQueenCory (talk) 02:33, December 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::Sollux's other corpse isn't available. Because it isn't a corpse. It'll likely be just Equius or Equius and Dirk's severed head. 02:39, December 1, 2012 (UTC) :::::::Don't know where you got the idea that Sollux's corpse wasn't a corpse. :::::::*Sollux died from the vast glub while entering, fate of body unknown. :::::::*Sollux in his Derse dream body piloted the meteor to the Green Sun killing himself, Gamzee claimed this corpse. :::::::So yeah, Erisolsprite was either prototyped with the body that died taking the trolls to the Green Sun or Gamzee managed to claim Sollux's original body. - The Light6 (talk) 03:51, December 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::By his "other corpse" I meant the living half ghost body. That was admittedly poorly worded, I'm just kinda doubting he found the original body. Anyway, possibilities are Dirk's head and Calliope's head (which Gamzee likely has). Equius goes without saying. Aradia and Sollux are possibilities, but more remote ones, as it would be hard to get to their original bodies. 04:38, December 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::0_0 Cause you totally need the entirety of something to prototype it. It'd be pretty easy for someone who cuts up the bodies to put some of one body in this kernelsprite and some in this other. For that idea, however, Eridan would be the easier... give how he is already bifurcated... but I think Sollux would be more apt... given his gemini theme. -- FaeQueenCory (talk) 19:57, December 1, 2012 (UTC) Request comment on what I think is an error. "Kernelsprites require one pre-entry prototyping in order for the battlefield to successfully evolve to its final form, which is necessary in order to allow the Genesis Frog to grow." I believe this is false; let me explain. The game session requires, as a condition of winning, every Kernelsprite (that is, one for each player) to be pre-entry prototyped at least once (dead sessions and "special" sessions where materials come from outside the Medium instance are both notable exceptions). Without the full ''prototyping, the Battlefield never fully matures, and the Genesis Frog cannot grow without a fully-developed battlefield. If ''some, but not all, of the Kernelsprites are pre-entry prototyped, this is a type of doomed null session (but not ''a void session). The reason it is doomed is that any Genesis Frog produced will lack a fully-developed Skaia medium in which it needs to grow, so the players cannot win. The reason it is still a typical null session is that the time limit for beating the game has not changed, even though the game cannot be trumped. In a session doomed by insufficient prototyping, the meteors will launch and Skaia will defend itself as usual within the standard timeframe. This means there will be exiles, a ruined home planet, and the self-cloning process is allowed to exist. In a void session, ''none ''of the Kernelsprites are pre-entry prototyped. Void sessions are special because the initial state of the Battlefield is the only state permanently locked in a forced stalemate (no pieces other than the two Kings are allowed to participate). There is no time limit and no consorts are alive when the players enter. The Veil remains unchanged, as no meteors are ever summoned. There exists no portal back to the home planet unless one exists on Prospit or Derse. Monsters are extremely difficult and the "goal" of the session is long-term (and possibly there is no goal in the general case). Presumably, in any normal null session (whether it fails from a missed prototyping or more general failure) the entire Veil will be sent to destroy Skaia. Thus after the game's conclusion, there will be no Veil remaining. Players could continue to live on their quest planets, but it's not clear whether the enemies will still be there in large number. Players could live on the destroyed home planet. Void sessions provide greater flexibility and players can remain in the Medium for years with little difficulty. It's notable that not all of the meteors in the post-Scratch trolls' Medium were launched at Skaia. Their session was not a standard null session, however. Although Karkat refers to it as a "null session", theirs is technically a winning session. The Universe they created was imperfect, and the entry gate was destroyed before they could travel to it, but since the session was technically won, meteors remained in the Veil. Anyway, can someone please confirm whether or not I'm right about the game requiring (for victory in a non-dead, non-imported materials session) a full prototyping, not just a single pre-entry Kernelsprite prototyping? TricksterWolf (talk) 09:31, December 27, 2012 (UTC) :I think you might be repeating more than is needed for the topic at hand, but I digress. The comic has stated that only a single pre-entry prototyping is needed, we are only saying what has already been said. In any case, the B1 Battlefield is being used to make B2 winnable, and 3 out of 4 of the B1 entries only had a single prototyping pre-entry. The only sprite that was fully prototyped prior to entry was Rose's. In any case, the trolls did create a universe so your premise is already null and the reason the universe the trolls created was imperfect was explicitly stated to be because they missed the final frog, nothing about the Battlefield was said, and if it did cause a problem that would also exist in the universe the kids will create, however the story is drawing to its conclusion, that means such an arc is unlikely given the time, which means if it isn't an issue than the statement is correct and only a single pre-entry prototyping is needed. - The Light6 (talk) 09:46, December 27, 2012 (UTC) ::I'm '''certain '''the comic said a fully-evolved Battlefield is required for the Genesis Frog. Can you point me to your reference? I think you might be misinterpreting what was actually meant as "for each sprite, a single pre-entry prototyping is needed". TricksterWolf (talk) 09:51, December 27, 2012 (UTC) :::Ha! Found it. From 6602: :::"ROSE: Without 'successive prototypings, the battlefield will never reach its ''final form, which must be fertilized'' to grow a new universe." :::Seems clear to me. TricksterWolf (talk) 09:54, December 27, 2012 (UTC) ::::Rose is clearly talking about successive prototypings as in, one (or two) received as reach player enters, until all players have entered. And especially given the context of the conversation, Rose would mention that John needed to prototype Jade's sprite twice, she doesn't, she only says it needs to be prototyped. And if two were needed than it would already be impossible due to John and Dave's single prototyping entry, but it isn't. - The Light6 (talk) 10:01, December 27, 2012 (UTC) :::::Seriously? The comic is very clear that the only way for the Battlefield to reach its final form is if each player prototypes their sprite before entering. This is what "successive prototyping" refers to. The Battlefield cannot reach its final form until all players have entered the game. Where are you getting this stuff...? TricksterWolf (talk) 10:04, December 27, 2012 (UTC) :::::Wait, I think you're confused about my question. I'm saying that each sprite must be prototyped once pre-entry, and the way it's currently worded it sounds like (to me) only one of the player's sprites need be prototyped at all. It's ambiguously worded at least. It sounds like you're parroting back what I was saying above in the tl;dr post, so let me know if I'm misreading you please. TricksterWolf (talk) 10:06, December 27, 2012 (UTC) :::::I'll admit that personally I'm very confused by your meaning, it seems like your point was "every sprite needs to be prototyped twice pre-entry or the game is unwinnable", and it also seems to me that you're entirely misunderstanding what The Light6 is saying. 10:14, December 27, 2012 (UTC) ::::::It seems there was a misunderstanding, I think your initial post contained far too much irreverent information which is what caused the confusion, to me you were saying that you think sprites had to be prototyped twice pre-entry in order to be successful. As for your interpretation of the quote from the article, I think the quote is clear, it says that Kernelsprite'''s require one prototyping pre-entry, not "a Kernelsprite needs to be prototyped prior to entry", I am fairly sure the article is already clear on the matter. - The Light6 (talk) 10:12, December 27, 2012 (UTC) :::::::I appreciate your perspective but it wasn't entirely clear for me for the same reason (plural sprites require one prototyping can be read as all of the sprites together only require one in total; this is reinforced by the definition of a special void session, hence the diatribe above). I've made a minor change to the text to clarify. I don't mind if it changes from this but I would prefer at least an "each" in there to remove the ambiguity. TricksterWolf (talk) 10:16, December 27, 2012 (UTC) Now that you've made the edit I do see the point you were trying to make, and I do think that the new wording makes it much clearer. 10:20, December 27, 2012 (UTC) Prototype Limits One more question. I don't see anything in the article (might have missed it though) explaining that there is a limit of two prototypes per sprite. Is this not the case? Every sprite other than 11 of the trolls has two prototypes (if you count combined prototypings as "two"). Additionally, if a sprite prototypes the very moment it touches an object, would it not be impossible for sprites prototyped only a single time to manipulate objects without accidentally prototyping them? That seems like a heavy restriction, but given the "accidental" prototypings we've seen thusfar it may be accurate. TricksterWolf (talk) 09:48, December 27, 2012 (UTC) :That's the thing: We haven't exactly received direct confirmation or denial that there is a limit of two prototypings, or at all. And yes, it would indeed be impossible. We should find out soon though: Dirk is about to touch ARquiusprite's muscle. 09:51, December 27, 2012 (UTC) :Well sprites don't prototype the moment they are touched, without issue. And Jane's Kernelsprite passed though her house's walls without prototyping the house. I guess it is possible that a sprite could choose not to be prototyped, or that touching isn't enough, rather it has to be combined in some specific way. In any case there hasn't been any exposition on it and there likely never will be, because the answer is simply "video game logic". - The Light6 (talk) 10:01, December 27, 2012 (UTC) ::I'd think a house would be far too large to be prototyped, and the only things that seem to be "accidentally" prototyped are living or formerly-living things. But you're right about John high-fiving the sprite. I'd forgotten all about that. I don't know if I'd agree "we'll probably never know" though. It's a big comic and there's a game coming out eventually so it's always a possibility (I'd have no way to estimate likelihood esp. since lots of things we assumed wouldn't be returned to, have been). TricksterWolf (talk) 10:11, December 27, 2012 (UTC) :::Gl'bgolyb was the size of a city and was prototyped without issue, Jane's house is tiny in comparison. Also given the game will be limited in what it can do, you will probably just select what you want to be prototyped, fancy complexities like touching, and accidental touching, etc probably won't factor into it. - The Light6 (talk) 10:16, December 27, 2012 (UTC) I think I've got it: *Items cannot be prototyped by the sprite moving around on its own. It may or may not have a consciousness (Dave thought it was suggesting to prototype Lil Cal), but when it comes to actually prototyping, the kernelsprite cannot take the action upon itself. *Any inanimate object (including dead beings) that is thrown, falls into, or enters the sprite in some way independent of the sprite's own movement, then it is prototyped. *A living being will not be prototyped upon touching the sprite if prototyping itself was not the being's intent, and if the being does inted to prototype itself then it will be prototyped. 12:28, December 27, 2012 (UTC) Can you prototype a kernelsprite with a kernelsprite? I see no reason why not, its a very simple solution to the evolving king and queens/Jack problem because it essentially turn them into what the king and queen/Jack are. All sprites put into one. The3rdplayer (talk) 18:26, November 29, 2013 (UTC) :It really does raise the question of what the prototyping effect on them would be, exactly. And by the way, before Hussie apparently debunked the idea, a lot of people speculated that Caliborn's cruxtruder had released his and Calliope's kernelsprites at exactly the same tim, causing them to try to prototype each other and a sort of "divide by zero" error, which led to the black hole collapse. That would be the real issue with it, the kernelsprite being prototyped also trying to prototype the kernelsprite it was being added to. 22:02, November 29, 2013 (UTC) ::That's tier one prototyping where the sprite has no say. I'm talking post medium entry where the sprite can say what it does and does not want to be prototyped with. All you need is for one to try to be prototyped and the other to not to avoid the whole cataclysmic black hole effect problem. The3rdplayer (talk) 22:37, November 29, 2013 (UTC) :::I'm really not so sure its ability to decide has anything to do with being pre- or post-entry. The only instance (to my recollection, at least) where a sprite was supposedly indicating what it wanted to be prototyped with was crowsprite floating near Cal's remains. In regards to that, *It was already tier one prototyped, which might mean it had a higher intelligence level. *Alternatively, Dave may have been completely imagining that the sprite was actually requesting to be prototyped with Cal. *Actually, come to think of it, the harlequinsprite didn't want to be prototyped with the joke book, but it had to actually avoid physical contact with the book to avoid being prototyped. I don't think a sprite can just "decide" not to be prototyped with an object that's thrown into it, so that theory doesn't work. :Besides, if the goal here really is to prevent the underlings and royalty from evolving, it's as simple as not prototyping with anything, or making all prototypings post-entry. 23:00, November 29, 2013 (UTC)